What happens when an intelligent lay person debates global warming scientists?

The Einstein defender (Dr. M) set me straight on a minor technical issue that was not really germane to the central questions at stake. The global warming defender (Dr. G) was a clearer thinker than Dr. M., albeit more hostile and obnoxious. Dr. G set me straight on two points that are worthy of telling our readers about. However, he brushed aside a couple of major issues that effectively neutralized the impact of his points.

What I did not expect was that both of the scientists made great blunders, which opened opportunities for me to explain the central fallacies of their case. This was fun for me, but not for them. Neither scientist was grateful to have his mistaken assumptions and errors of logic and theory pointed out. I learned and grew from the experience. They both went away in angry denial with parting insults, having learned nothing. Scientific debate during this era of institutional monopolies on scientific models is not what it is cracked up to be.

Read the article